We need a new Covid Strategy...

[Hazelnutbean]

Suppressing Omicron, a disease that seems to be little more than a bad cold for most (having had the protection of vaccines or prior infection) seems to be so transmissible that it will be impossible to contain unless we live a permanent lockdown.

Wouldn't a better strategy be to just accept this and:
a) allow it to pass through low risk groups scrapping isolation, with people just off work if too ill;
b) bring back shielding for the CEV extending to whole households to allow proper protection, fully financially
and practically supported;

The latter would put a dent in workforce numbers, but so is all the isolation that current measures require, but the speed of Omicron transmission would mean that if it was allowed to spread exponentially in low risk groups (most of whom would only need a couple of days off if at all) it max out in a couple of weeks and burn out in a month or so, meaning these measures would only be needed for six weeks or so.

Yes, it's a bit shit for those shielding with their families, but if we carry on as we are, they'll likely have to shield anyway but for longer.

@ElectraBlue

'It mutates into something worse. Or it has so far, anyway.''

It hasn't. In fact it is just doing the opposite: mutating into something more transmissible but milder, like most viruses do...

You must let the experts including those at the WHO know the good news. As of earlier today, they advised it's still not known whether or not Omicron will be more mild (and in fact they suspected not).

like most viruses do

You don't know what they all do. Particularly not one that might have lab rather than natural origins. But even if natural, it's new. You cannot possibly know, unless you're a time traveller, what it will do, nor if it does become milder how long (years, decades) it might take.

The other countries that have increasing restrictions/lockdowns? Yeah, that’s worked out really well for them.

@MarshaBradyo

What do the Netherlands have in place?

Even Germany had a delta wave

Omicron is going to be tough no matter what. Light touch stuff won’t do much

www.government.nl/latest/news/2021/12/18/slowing-the-spread-of-the-omicron-variant-lockdown-in-the-netherlands

Well yes I know about the lockdown

So what was in place before that? Because it hasn’t stopped lockdown.

@bumbleymummy

The other countries that have increasing restrictions/lockdowns? Yeah, that’s worked out really well for them.

They're in a better position than us. And they're taking swift proactive action to try to keep it that way.

You can't get rid of all the risks but you can mitigate.

Anyway, whilst most of Europe is better than us (not hard), look further East for an exemplary approach.

This is the consequences of not following the Asia Pacific basic common sense and infection control model. Two years dragged out, restrictions on/off and/or overfull hospitals, huge number of untimely deaths, ruined mental and physical health, and damaged economy. Yep. Definitely better (and cheaper) to have had temporary pandemic border controls (with real quarantine where necessary for genuinely essential travel). This would've all been over more than a year ago. No pandemic in the first place. It won't happen but it's likely still the quickest way out. Will they learn for next time is the question.

If only we could rewind a bit further and China not start it at all

I agree with OP as we can't continually live in this constant state of flux - by making a commitment for everything to continue with only those who are CV isolating should they choose to do so we provide stability. The economy needs stability and people like certainly and this constant talk of lockdown and erratic behaviour does not help. The impact on the young and their mental health is huge, missed diagnoses, long term poverty and the long term health impact are huge and a this in my view will in time believe a higher price than the price we are currently paying with the current covid policy

because the most vulnerable are too frail for invasive procedures

This is simply not true. The critically vulnerable (the 500,000) include patients who are in excellent health, but just happen to need seriously heavy duty needs to keep their cancer at bat, stop their body rejecting the transplant etc. They are excellent candidates for CU treatment, because all their body, exceot for elements of their immune system , is working so well. Hell, they might even be normal weight children, teens and young adults

only those who are CV isolating should they choose to do so we provide stability

That's over 8 million people, of all ages, including DC. Add another 2m for the CEV, 0.5million fir the critically vulnerable, and then a few
million elderly.

How on earth are you going to organise society to support all these people?

Or are you going to say that they won't be supported? And then just cries your fingers that you never get regnant, or get cancer?

The current strategy is creating a new vulnerable in society which is those who are not coping with lockdown - which will result in long term mental health issues or suicide, greater abuse - of children and adults in households, of those who are not diagnosed with diseases due to the covid obsession.

Those who are CV or CEV (who are regularly told they should just tidy themselves out of the way so others can crack on) are just as susceptible to MH issues, new cancer diagnoses, other abuse (inc DV), to have children in precarious circumstances (made more precarious if household falls into poverty)

They really need to be high priority for support, for living under greater restriction that everyone else is really tough

@nether

because the most vulnerable are too frail for invasive procedures

This is simply not true. The critically vulnerable (the 500,000) include patients who are in excellent health, but just happen to need seriously heavy duty needs to keep their cancer at bat, stop their body rejecting the transplant etc. They are excellent candidates for CU treatment, because all their body, exceot for elements of their immune system , is working so well. Hell, they might even be normal weight children, teens and young adults

Sorry it's difficult the way 'not healthy' can be interpreted. The way it's been widely used during the pandemic, to describe anyone with an underlying condition - however well managed and otherwise healthy the patient is. I agree with you, it can be a misleading term.

Many people - with all kinds of different well managed underlying conditions are in everyday good health.

I was responding to a poster who was doing the Its Only The Vulnerable line. They're wrong. It's been widely reported that the majority of people in ICU - at least, up until this week, are people described by doctors as previously healthy - by that they mean no underlying conditions.

You're right to point out that not every underlying condition means too frail for ICU. When I say the most vulnerable, I mean vulnerable as in too frail to undergo the potentially lifesaving treatment of ICU. Hence their very high risk of death.

@nether

Those who are CV or CEV (who are regularly told they should just tidy themselves out of the way so others can crack on) are just as susceptible to MH issues, new cancer diagnoses, other abuse (inc DV), to have children in precarious circumstances (made more precarious if household falls into poverty)

They really need to be high priority for support, for living under greater restriction that everyone else is really tough

Yes you're right.

I agree that these groups are susceptible to those possibilities. My point is people who are CEV and CV already fall into that category - we can't do anything about it. However, we can do something to stop other groups falling into those categories and I believe we should. That doesn't mean we ignore the CEV and CV but the choice is theirs, they can if they feel the risk of mixing in society which is open is too big a risk then they can shield and isolate.

The current strategy is creating a new vulnerable in society.

Yes agreed. Particularly the Long Covid sufferers.

Far better strategy to take proper mitigation measures. Like another ill conceived policy - austerity, letting the bodies pile up is not only immoral, it's also ineffective and an economic failure.

Many of the CEV and CV have children. Who care very much about their CV parent. And some of the CEV are children. Their lives (and mental health) are as valuable as anyone else's.

But anyway. More than 50% of the UK adult population are CV to some extent. Including many many essential workers. Good luck getting mental health help (or any other care) with them dead or off sick.

This is only going on so long because of failure to put in place effective mitigation measures. Other countries are doing better than us for a reason.

@nether

Those who are CV or CEV (who are regularly told they should just tidy themselves out of the way so others can crack on) are just as susceptible to MH issues, new cancer diagnoses, other abuse (inc DV), to have children in precarious circumstances (made more precarious if household falls into poverty)

They really need to be high priority for support, for living under greater restriction that everyone else is really tough

Well, maybe if they’ve had three doses of the vaccine they need to just ‘crack on’ themselves? I mean, what did they do in previous years during flu season? We never locked down then and their flu vaccine wouldn’t have been as effective. Most people just made the decision to take the risk and get on with their life.

A further issue is the NHS policy of staying at home when living with someone with covid. Of course it's sensible if the NHS was well staffed but it's not when staff are limited anyway.

Surely this is what LFTs are for? DH is frontline NHS and due to myself and DC x 2 all having covid over the last few months has had almost 6 weeks off. He's yet to catch it! Must be made of iron or something but still, now is the time that policy should be revisited or, the isolation period halved perhaps.

What will happen is that over the coming weeks or months as data comes through and is analysed, a clearer picture of % of ICU patients that are vaxxed compared to unvaxxed will emerge.

As projected unvaxxed patients are far more likely to be chronically ill and the government will have no choice but to implement Covid passports and possibly make vaccines mandatory.

This is the only other option to lockdown which is or course unfeasible for both financial reasons as well as mental health.

@LeadMeHome or maybe he’s already immune?

Agree that the isolation policy needs to be reviewed. Daily tests sounds like a better alternative.

@AnnieSmithson according to latest ICNARC report, 48% of icu admissions were unvaccinated in November.

Not sure what you think vaccine passports would achieve. Latest report from ICL states that protection from symptomatic infection after two doses has fallen to 0-20%. Testing for all would make more sense.

48% of icu admissions were unvaccinated in November.

So proportionally a very high number. Given that the majority are vaccinated.

More countries are joining France in taking mitigations against travellers from high risk countries.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10325017/Germany-force-Britons-entering-country-TWO-WEEK-quarantine.html

Not sure what you think vaccine passports would achieve.

Posters from European, Arab, and Asian countries (the UK is an outlier) have posted on several threads about this. They're not a panacea but they have made a (positive) difference.

There is more clarity now on who is most vulnerable, particularly since the vaccinations. It's not like 2020 where the CEV lists were very extensive. This important data and more use should be made of it.

While the unvaxxed are an issue when it comes to nhs resource, the more vulnerable unvaxxed are the major problem. I think a more targeted programme to get percentages as high as they can feasibly be among over 60s would be of most benefit.

There is more clarity now on who is most vulnerable, particularly since the vaccinations. It's not like 2020 where the CEV lists were very extensive. This important data and more use should be made of it.

Yes. It's many more people than those lists. Over 50% of the UK adult population, in fact.

But also it depends what you mean by vulnerable. Vulnerable to dying from it? Or do you include the higher figure of vulnerable to being hospitalised - which of course has knock on effects, i.e. on non Covid patient care.

Don't forget too, the impact of mass 'mild' infection - sheer chaos of huge numbers of staff sickness all at the same time.

And then there's the minority disabled by Long Covid. A minority, yes, but a significant minority.